↓ Skip to main content

The effect of different volumes of high-intensity interval training on proinsulin in participants with the metabolic syndrome: a randomised trial

Overview of attention for article published in Diabetologia, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
9 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
40 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
274 Mendeley
Title
The effect of different volumes of high-intensity interval training on proinsulin in participants with the metabolic syndrome: a randomised trial
Published in
Diabetologia, August 2016
DOI 10.1007/s00125-016-4064-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Joyce S. Ramos, Lance C. Dalleck, Fabio Borrani, Alistair R. Mallard, Bronwyn Clark, Shelley E. Keating, Robert G. Fassett, Jeff S. Coombes

Abstract

The continuous demand for insulin in the face of insulin resistance, coupled with the glucolipotoxic environment associated with the metabolic syndrome (MetS), adversely affects the quality of insulin produced and secreted by the pancreatic beta cells. This is depicted by increased circulating intact proinsulin concentration, which is associated with increased MetS severity and risk of cardiovascular (CV) mortality. High-intensity interval training (HIIT) has been shown to reduce insulin resistance and other CV disease risk factors to a greater degree than moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT). We therefore aimed to investigate the impact of MICT and different volumes of HIIT on circulating intact proinsulin concentration. This was a substudy of the 'Exercise in prevention of Metabolic Syndrome' (EX-MET) multicentre trial. Sixty-six individuals with MetS were randomised to 16 weeks of: (1) MICT (n = 21, 30 min at 60-70% peak heart rate [HRpeak], five times/week); (2) 4HIIT (n = 22, 4 × 4 min bouts at 85-95% HRpeak, interspersed with 3 min of active recovery at 50-70% HRpeak, three times/week); or (3) 1HIIT (n = 23, 1 × 4 min bout at 85-95% HRpeak, three times/week). A subanalysis investigated the differential impact of these training programmes on intact proinsulin concentration in MetS individuals with type 2 diabetes (MICT, n = 6; 4HIIT, n = 9; 1HIIT, n = 12) and without type 2 diabetes (MICT, n = 15; 4HIIT, n = 13; 1HIIT, n = 11). Intact proinsulin, insulin and C-peptide concentrations were measured in duplicate via ELISA, following a 12 h fast, before and after the exercise programme. Fasting intact proinsulin concentration was also expressed relative to insulin and C-peptide concentrations. Following the exercise training, there were no significant (p > 0.05) changes in fasting intact proinsulin concentration indices in all participants (pre- vs post-programme proinsulin, proinsulin:insulin, proinsulin:C-peptide: MICT 19% decrease, 6% increase, 4% increase; 4HIIT 19% decrease, 8% decrease, 11% decrease; 1HIIT 34% increase, 49% increase, 36% increase). In participants who did not have type 2 diabetes, only 4HIIT significantly (p < 0.05) reduced fasting intact proinsulin concentration indices from pre to post intervention (pre- vs post-programme proinsulin, proinsulin:insulin, proinsulin:C-peptide: 4HIIT 32% decrease, 26% decrease, 32% decrease, p < 0.05; 1HIIT, 14% increase, 32% increase, 16% increase, p > 0.05; MICT 27% decrease, 17% decrease, 11% decrease), with a group × time interaction effect, indicating a greater reduction in intact proinsulin indices following 4HIIT compared with MICT and 1HIIT. There were no significant (p > 0.05) changes in intact proinsulin concentration indices in participants with type 2 diabetes. Higher-volume HIIT (4HIIT) improved insulin quality in MetS participants without type 2 diabetes. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01676870 FUNDING: The study was funded by the Norwegian University of Science and Technology and from an unrestricted research grant from the Coca-Cola company. Funding for the collection of physical activity data was derived from a 'UQ New Staff Start Up' grant awarded to B. Clark.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 274 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Indonesia 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 272 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 54 20%
Student > Bachelor 38 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 29 11%
Researcher 18 7%
Other 12 4%
Other 47 17%
Unknown 76 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 57 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 44 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 39 14%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 3%
Other 27 10%
Unknown 91 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 June 2019.
All research outputs
#2,008,825
of 24,223,370 outputs
Outputs from Diabetologia
#1,073
of 5,233 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#37,831
of 373,414 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Diabetologia
#27
of 83 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,223,370 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,233 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 24.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 373,414 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 83 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.